Skip to main content
Glama

Delegum

by com.delegum

calcular_prestacion_maternidad_paternidad

Read-only

Calcula la prestación por nacimiento/adopción (maternidad/paternidad) de un progenitor. Tras el RDL 9/2025, la duración es de 19 semanas por progenitor en familias biparentales (32 semanas en familias monoparentales), al 100% de la base reguladora. Devuelve la cuantía diaria y mensual, la duración total (con extras por parto múltiple o discapacidad), las 6 semanas obligatorias y el reparto de las semanas flexibles, y verifica el período de carencia según la edad.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
numero_hijosNoNúmero de hijos en el parto (1=simple, 2+=múltiple, suma semanas). Por defecto 1.
tipo_familiaNoTipo de familia: "biparental" (19 semanas, por defecto) o "monoparental" (32 semanas, RDL 9/2025).
cumple_carenciaNo¿Cumple el período de carencia exigido? Por defecto true.
edad_progenitorYesTramo de edad del progenitor (determina la carencia exigida)
situacion_laboralNoSituación laboral del progenitor. Por defecto trabajador por cuenta ajena.
hijo_con_discapacidadNo¿Algún hijo con discapacidad ≥33%? (añade 2 semanas). Por defecto false.
base_cotizacion_mensualYesBase de cotización mensual del mes anterior al inicio de la prestación (€)

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already mark the tool as read-only (readOnlyHint: true). The description adds value by detailing the output (daily and monthly amounts, duration, extras for multiple birth/disability, obligatory weeks, flexible weeks, and carencia verification). It also mentions the legal update, which provides context beyond the annotations. No contradictions.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is fairly concise for the information it conveys. It is structured with the purpose first, then legal context, then output details. Every sentence adds value. However, it could be slightly more terse by moving some details (e.g., exact week numbers) to the schema or usage notes.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the lack of an output schema, the description fully explains the return values (daily and monthly amounts, duration with extras, obligatory weeks, flexible weeks, carencia check). It also covers key inputs implicitly (age, family type, disability). The legal reference provides complete context for the calculation.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100% with parameter descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The description adds high-level context (duration formulas, extras) but does not provide additional semantic details for individual parameters beyond what the schema already provides. It adequately complements the schema without adding significant new meaning.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the verb 'Calcula' and the specific resource 'prestación por nacimiento/adopción (maternidad/paternidad) de un progenitor'. It also provides the legal context (RDL 9/2025), making the purpose unambiguous. Among sibling tools, this is distinct from other calculators like calcular_deduccion_maternidad_irpf or calcular_pension_desempleo, so the purpose is well-differentiated.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implicitly indicates when to use this tool (to calculate maternity/paternity benefits) but does not explicitly exclude alternatives or provide comparison with sibling tools. There are no when-not-to-use instructions. Given the large sibling set, more explicit guidance would help.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

All Delegum toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Disambiguation3/5

There are many tools with overlapping domains (e.g., multiple retirement calculators, home buying calculators), but detailed descriptions and explicit guidance on when to use comprehensive vs. specific tools help clarify. However, the sheer number (49) still creates potential confusion for an agent.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools follow a consistent convention: infinitive verb or noun prefix (calcular, comparar, consulta) followed by descriptive noun phrase in snake_case. No mixed styles or irregularities.

Tool Count3/5

49 tools is high but justifiable given the broad scope of Spanish financial/legal calculations. It leans toward the heavy side but remains within a manageable range for a comprehensive server.

Completeness4/5

The tool set covers a wide spectrum of personal finance: income, taxes, housing, inheritance, self-employment, investments, etc. Only minor gaps exist (e.g., no separate tool for rental income beyond the alquiler tools, but included in IRPF).

Resources